I don’t understand why you don’t get that they paid nothing for the shares, histrionics show that Hilton paid £3 for the whole 8,900,000 of them from Swanny, who in turn gave them to Michelle who then in turn allocated (ie gave) to the 3 directors to be equal.
You can hope all you want but it won’t change the facts.
Who says I don’t get it?
As I said in another thread, there’s very little room for subtlety or nuance on here.
I was attempting to generate some debate on the morality of, essentially, directors getting a massive share of ownership of the football club in exchange for putting in money that they can then demand back in full.
